What would we do without the experts — teachers told to avoid white paper because it may cause racism

No, honestly. That’s according to a story in the UK’s Telegraph. Additionally, witches should be dressed in pink, fairies should be in darker pastels and when a teacher is asked their favorite color, they should answer “black” or “brown”.

All of this from experts who are “early years consultants”. The premise of course is changing all these colors changes the perception of everything among a bunch of kids who haven’t yet digested that the kid next to them is a different color:

Instead, teachers should censor the toy box and replace the pointy black hat with a pink one, while dressing fairies, generally resplendent in pale pastels, in darker shades.

Another staple of the classroom – white paper – has also been questioned by Anne O’Connor, an early years consultant who advises local authorities on equality and diversity.

Children should be provided with paper other than white to drawn on and paints and crayons should come in "the full range of flesh tones", reflecting the diversity of the human race, according to the former teacher.

Finally, staff should be prepared to be economical with the truth when asked by pupils what their favourite colour is and, in the interests of good race relations, answer "black" or "brown".

Yes friends, white paper is racist because it doesn’t reflect the diversity of color out there, or something.

And yes, witches, soften them up with pink pointy hats I guess. Otherwise you’re likely to get … witchism? Can’t wait to see if this takes hold by Halloween.

If not, I suppose I ought to lecture the parents about the fact that they’re engaged in turning their little witches into racists. Yeah, that’s the ticket.

Oh and before you start thinking “those stupid Brits”, pause and reflect:

The advice is based on an “anti-bias” approach to education which developed in the United States as part of multiculturalism.

It challenges prejudices such as racism, sexism and ageism through the whole curriculum and teaches children about tolerance and respect and to critically analyse what they are taught and think.

Right. And what they’re taught to think is things like affirmative action is the cat’s meow. I have to laugh when I see claims such as this – they’re not taught to “critically analyze” what they’re taught, they’re taught what to think and regurgitate on command. They’re propagandized and introduced to group think.

"This is an incredibly complex subject that can easily become simplified and inaccurately portrayed," she said.

"There is a tendency in education to say ‘here are normal people and here are different people and we have to be kind to those different people’, whether it’s race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age or faith.

"People who are feeling defensive can say ‘well there’s nothing wrong with white paper’, but in reality there could be if you don’t see yourself reflected in the things around you. “As an early years teacher, the minute you start thinking, ‘well actually, if I give everyone green paper, what happens’, you have a teaching potential.

“People might criticise this as political correctness gone mad. But it is because of political correctness we have moved on enormously. If you think that we now take it for granted that our buildings and public highways are adapted so people in wheelchairs and with pushchairs can move around. Years ago if you were in a wheelchair, then tough luck. We have completely moved and we wouldn’t have done that without the equality movement.”

Actually it isn’t an “incredibly complex subject, but “experts” don’t get paid consulting fees unless they at least try to make it one. And I at least appreciate the fact that it is acknowledged as political correctness.

Take a look at that load of pap above and then consider this:

Margaret Morrissey, a spokeswoman for the Parents Outloud campaigning group disagrees. She said: “I’m sure these early years experts know their field but they seem to be obsessed about colour and determined to make everyone else obsessed about it too.

“Not allowing toy witches to wear black seems to me nonsense and in the same vein as those people who have a problem with ‘Bar Bar Black Sheep’ or ‘The Three Little Pigs’.

Children just see a sheep in a field, whether it be black, grey, white or beige. I have worked with children for 41 years and I don’t believe I have ever met a two year old who was in any way racist or prejudice.”

But:

However, recent research by Professor Lord Winston provides evidence that children as young as four can hold racist views. In an experiment carried out for the BBC’s Child of our Time series, children were presented with a series of images of faces of men, women, boys or girls. Only one of the faces in each sequence was white.

Children were asked to pick out the face of the person they wanted as their friend and the person they thought would be most likely to get in to trouble.

Almost all white children in the survey associated positive qualities exclusively with photographs of white children or adults. More than half of the black children made the same associations.

In contrast, people with darker faces were viewed as troublemakers.

Of course we have no idea of the experiences the children in question have had or what they’re home life teaches them. We just conclude that they associate dark with bad for no other reason than they’re inherently prejudiced. And apparently they assume they can change that by changing the color of their paper and claiming, whether true or not, that favorite colors are “black” and “brown”.

It is, again, the state via the school system, attempting to dictate a certain type of behavior or belief. This is the same sort of model that is used with the environment – where children are taught (or propagandized if you prefer) that much of what supports their standard of living is bad and harmful to the environment.

By the way, critical analysis requires what? That both sides of an argument be presented factually and objectively, right? Clearly in the case above and the environmental example (at least based on what I’ve seen), that’s not the case. And calling it that is simply the usual redefinition of a word or concept that is so prevalent (and insidious) these days .

So put up your white paper, you racists. Don’t you know that your insistence on using it is just racism? Readability – phaa. Your clients will welcome your new orange stationary, I promise.

And here I thought white paper was merely supposed to be a blank background that wouldn’t force it’s color on other colors set on top of it, so the red was allowed to be red, the black was allowed to be black, the brown to be brown, the yellow to be yellow, without the color of the paper influencing, nay, oppressing, those colors with it’s own tint.

Clarity, accuracy, realism or fantasy – these must bow at the great alter that prohibits the rational use of a blank slate for your background. Let me know how the picture of the brown house on a sunny day with blue skies comes out with that other than white paper as it’s backdrop.

I could be wrong, but 20 years ago when mine were starting school, I’m RATHER sure the ‘school psychologist’ would have had a serious problem with us as a family if any of my sons had chosen ‘black’ as their favorite color and no doubt would have recommended we seek professional counseling to determine if they were despressed.

“`So we’re actually going to land in a minute?”
“Well not so much land, in fact, not actually land as such, no … er …”
“What are you talking about?” said Ford sharply.
“Well,” said the Captain, picking his way through the words carefully, “I think as far as I can remember we were programmed to crash on it.”
“Crash?” shouted Ford and Arthur.
“Er, yes,” said the Captain, “yes, it’s all part of the plan I think. There was a terribly good reason for it which I can’t quite remember at the moment. It was something to with … er …”
Ford exploded.
“You’re a load of useless bloody loonies!” he shouted.
“Ah yes, that was it,” beamed the Captain, “that was the reason.””

We need to run out of money faster, so these people can no longer get grants.
But then, this person would be running the taco Bell drive through, and that could disrupt my service…maybe its best they stay where they are.

Which of the following solutions to racism will take place faster,
A. voluntary inter-racial marriage will gradually make race less and less distinguishable or important and societal shame will make racism unacceptable.
B. we can brainwash small children to view colors differently.

Well, since Pol Pot failed, and there is no new soviet man, I think option A sounds a whole lot easier.

For a long time I read accounts like McQ’s with horror, assuming my fellow citizens had lost their minds. Perhaps some of them have.

But I’m coming to believe that most of them are just doing their jobs, their reasonably lucrative, not too strenuous jobs. They say absurd things and do absurd things because that’s what keeps those jobs going, and not only going but expanding.

I remember a time when teachers used to write on big, black colored things in front of the class and we copied the info down on to white paper. Blackboards i think we called them? Doesn’t that indicate a black master in front of the kids subservient white copies?? Even further back in the enlightened past, in my grand-daddy’s day, i think the kids wrote on black slates. Oh what wonderful non-racist times the early 20th century must have been!

From what I have been able to find, that means a freelance elementary teacher. At first I thought it would be some new name for a child psychologist, but it seems that only a regular elementary teaching degree or experience is required. The fancy title probably enables them to charge more.

Way back in the twentieth century we were told that racism didn’t come naturally to a child, it had to be taught. Now, in the 21st century we know better. Racism is absorbed from your surroundings. Like an allergy, I suppose.